armchairgm
all sports, all you
+ Add Friends
You are not logged-in.
Sign Up - Log In
Main Page
Sports
Write
Articles
Hot Links
Images
Meet People
Fun
Explore
MLB - NFL - NBA - NHL - College Basketball - College Football - Soccer - Nascar - Other
Article - Locker Room Discussion
All Articles - New Articles - Today's Articles
Submit a Link - Approve Links
Picture Game - Ratings - Polls - Pick Game - Quiz Game - Spring Silliness
Random Page - Random Image - Random Fan

About the Author

LouGehrig
I have been a Yankees fan for many years. Thanks to what has occurred during the last few years, I am beginning to wonder.

More By LouGehrig

From Ninth to First: What If the Red Sox Had Tony Conigliaro in October?
2 votes, 0 comments
What If Brad Lidge Had Started Game One?
3 votes, 0 comments
The Greatest Offensive Season by an Infield
5 votes, 1 comment
View All

Other recent voters

If you like the article, vote for it.
Edit
Page history Discuss pageWhat links here

Comparing Baseball Eras is Impossible or What Sabermeticians Can't Do

by LouGehrig
created June 23, 2008, last edited February 10, 2009
15
Vote

by Harold Friend

There is absolutely NO WAY to validly compare players who played in baseball’s early days with today’s players. In 1910, the Philadelphia Athletics beat the Chicago Cubs in a five game World Series. The Athletics’ top pitcher, Jack Coombs, started, completed, and won three games. Chief Bender, the Athletics’ next best pitcher, started and completed two games, winning one and losing one. Bender started games on October 17 and October 22, which gave him four days of rest between starts, but Coombs started Game 2 on October 18, Game 3 on October 20, and Game on October 23 on two days rest -- three complete games in the World Series in six days.

Radical Changes Have Occurred

In 1910, the baseball, the rules governing legal pitches, the ballparks, the bats, the managers' approach, the strike zone, the height of the pitching mound, the size of the players, and the races of the players allowed to participate were different. Let sabermetricians create all the formulas they want. There are too many variables that can never be controlled for us to ever know if Jack Coombs, who was one of the top two or three pitchers in 1910, would be one of the top two or three pitchers if he were to be transported, as he existed in 1910, to the game today.

Coombs started 38 games and completed 35. In 2007, Roy Halladay led the American League with 7 complete games. Coombs pitched 353 innings, won 31 games while losing only 9, and had a 1.30 ERA with a 182 ERA+. The LEAGUE ERA was 2.37. The greatest pitchers in the game today could not come close to matching those statistics because the conditions are radically different. Coombs was 6'0" and weight about 185 pounds. Roy Halladay is 6'6" and weighs about 225 pounds. That is a substantial difference.

Walter Johnson and Christy Mathewson

Walter Johnson (1907-1927) and Christy Mathewson (1900-1916) are considered the best pitchers of all time by many. Johnson was a fire baller while Mathewson had his "fadeway," which is a screwball thrown by a right hander. The 6'1", 200 lb. Johnson averaged 19 wins, 273 2/3 innings, and 24 complete games over a 162 game season. Mathewson, who was 6"2" and 195 lbs., averaged 20 wins, 274 innings, and 24 complete games over a 162 season. Fans, the media, and sabermetricians can speculate all they want. Would Johan Santana, Josh Beckett, Roy Halladay, Jake Peavey, Brandon Webb, a young Pedro, Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, or John Lackey be able to match those numbers if they played during the dead ball era? How would Johnson and Mathewson fare today?

Starting a World Series Game With "Only" Three Days Rest

When Bob Brenley decided to start Curt Schilling with "only" three days rest in Game 7 of the 2001 World Series, and Jack McKeon started Josh Beckett with three days rest in Game 6 of the 2003 World Series, the "experts" concluded that it was a risky move. But when Philadelphia Athletics' manager Connie Mack started Jack Coombs three times in six days, the decision was not questioned. The newspaper accounts of the game merely stated that Philadelphia's victory "...was a personal victory for Jack Coombs, Connie Mack's man of iron. It was his third performance in six days and what makes it more remarkable is that it was his best game of the three that he worked."

Too Many Variables, Too Few Controls

While it is impossible to validly compare players who played one hundred years apart, the game has changed enough since the 1994 strike that even comparing players from the 1960s with today's players is an exercise in futility. Modern medical advances, physical conditioning, better diets, pitch counts, and the use of "set up" men and "closers" are simply too many variables for statistical treatments to control. All that fans can do is argue and not unquestioningly accept "expert" opinions.

References:

"Athletics Win World Series; Jack Coombs Again Pitches Connie Mack's Team to Victory." New York Times. 24 October 1910, p. 6.

Baseball-Reference


Enable Comment Auto-Refresher
Niteowl049AAA-er
506 days ago
Score 3+-
I agree there is no way to realistically compare the players of the past with those today. They can do all the computer simulations they want but they don't use the intangibles that can never be duplicated in a computer simulation.
Permalink | Reply
JuTMSY4Legend
506 days ago
Score 3+-
I disagree...I think you can but It'd take significant work to extrapolate variables...

One of the bigger issues would certainly be philosophical changes in the game

All other things remaining equal, i often wonder how many games cy young would win today vs (pratically) a hundred years ago
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 2+-
Those varibales would be impossible to calculate. The balls, the bats, the gloves, the shoes, the uniforms, the stadiums and the motivation (money) have all changed DRAMATICALLY.

How do you calculate the convenience of air travel versus rail?

"significant work to extrapolate variables" means you get to ask G-D who was better when you die... that is "if"...
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 2+-
Glad to see you back contributing regularly Lou! ++
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Sure Connie Mack started Coombs three times in one series, but Mack was also a notorious hunch player over a guy trying to make logical sense... Old Man took many gambles and got very lucky a number of times.

What's amazing about Coombs is that he started games 2,3 and 5 and beat Three-Finger Brown twice!!

But the A's were playing the Cubs, so does it really count?
Permalink
LouGehrigRed-Shirting
506 days ago
Score 1+-
Thanks.
Permalink
LouGehrigRed-Shirting
506 days ago
Score 1+-
I forgot how much fun this place is.
Permalink
Niteowl049AAA-er
506 days ago
Score 2+-
I am sure the playing fields back then were not nearly as well taken care of as they are today. Plus the air travel today versus train travel made for shorter trips in some cases depending on how far they were traveling.
Permalink | Reply
Davis21wylieMVP
506 days ago
Score 1+-
You should read this piece on the distinction between ability and value... Sabermetrics will never be able to say "this guy would hit X if transported into the game today". That's an ability question, and we can only measure ability indirectly, through stats that are very much subject to the whims of context. However, we can say with much certainty that "this guy's performance in 1922 was more valuable to his team than this guy's performance today." That's a value question, and value is in the numbers themselves. Ability is context-free, and nothing can remove context completely. Value is about embracing the context, and that's something statistics certainly can measure.
Permalink | Reply
JuTMSY4Legend
506 days ago
Score 2+-
AKA 30 homers than is worth 60 today?
Permalink
Davis21wylieMVP
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Something like that.
Permalink
LouGehrigRed-Shirting
506 days ago
Score 1+-
Yes, but the problem remains. Value is relative but ability, while relative, is also something that can approach a limit and therefore, is close to being an absolute. There is a limit to how far a player can hit a ball, and there is a limit to how fast a pitcher can throw. In the Polo Grounds, Mel Ott was extremely valuable, but if he played at Griffith Stadium, he would hit many fewer home runs. Fred McGriff may have been a better home run hitter, but not as much as a pull hitter, so at the Polo Grounds, McGriff, the superior home run hitter, would be less valuable.
Permalink
Davis21wylieMVP
506 days ago
Score 0+-
That's kind of my point. A player's ability is absolute (a function of his eye-hand coordination, strength, speed, agility, and hundreds of other component "skills"), but we can never know for sure what that ability level is, we can't put a number on it. Value is how well that ability translates into a specific situation... Player A could have more value than Player B even if he has less ability, because his circumstances allow him to better translate his ability into performance/value. We're saying the same thing here: you can't prove what a player "would have done" in another context; you can prove how valuable he was in the context in which he actually played.
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 1+-
Wait a second, how is Fred McGriff a "superior" homerun hitter to Mel Ott?
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 1+-
Mel Ott never led both leagues in HR. What do I win?
Permalink
LouGehrigRed-Shirting
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Ott perfected the ability to pull the ball down the right field line. I should have written that McGriff had more power and was a better home run hitter, but he had more power than Ott. I find baseball very complicated at times.
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
You can't fault Ott for taking advantage of his home park, and where I come from, 511 beats 493, making Ott the better homer hitter.
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Last time I checked, 9,456 AB were more than 8,757 too...

Give 699 more AB to McGriff and who finishes with more HR?

This is FUN!!!
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Using KD's theory... Barry Bonds was a far superior HR hitter than Babe Ruth. 762 is more than 714, after all. And Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, Reggie Jackson and Rafael Palmiero were better HR hitters than Mickey Mantle. The numbers are clear.
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Jackson was a better HR hitter than Mantle, but Mantle was the better hitter. The other guys are irrelevant because they cheated.
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
He led his league six times, and finished second seven times. How's that work for you?
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Just arguing for argument's sake.

Ott hit more than 33 HRs only 4 times.

McGriff hit more than 33 hr SIX times.

And don't give me that "they only played 154 games in Ott's day" crap. McGriff only played more than 154 games once. Ott had 9 season of 150+ games 9 times, McGriff did it 10 times...
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
And McGriff walked 400 times less, and struck out 1000 times more, against inferior pitching in overall smaller parks. So what?
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
McGriff was an All Star MVP and Ott never was!

Check

Mate!

Seriously though... just look at HR per AB... McGriff was the better HR hitter. I'm not saying he was a better player (I'm crazy, not stupid) but McGriff deserves more support than he gets.
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Wow, 17.8 HR/AB to 18.5? You're right, Manny, damn, that is a big difference.
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
About as significant as 511 - 493...
Permalink
LouGehrigRed-Shirting
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Polo Grounds' distances were enormous in the alleys and center, but not down the right field line.

Right field: 256.25 (1921), 257.67 (1923), 257.5 (1931), 257.67 (1942).

In a park like the old Griffith Stadium, Ott would have some problems.
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
he played a lot of road games at Baker Bowl, too.
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Griffith Stadium was 320 to RF and 373 to RC. The Polo Grounds was 256 to RF and 449 to RC. Somehow, I doubt all of Ott's Polo Grounds homers were 260 footers in the corner.
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Somehow, I doubt ANY of McGriff's homers WERE...
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
506 days ago
Score 0+-
Mel Ott is a Hall of Famer, Fred McGriff will never be. argument over.
Permalink | Reply
LouGehrigRed-Shirting
506 days ago
Score 0+-
See Rabbit Maranville and Bill Mazeroski.
Permalink
The oldest manVarsity
506 days ago
Score 1+-
Excuse me Jackson a better homerun hitter than Mantle. You got to be out of your ever loving mind....Mantle switch hitter Jackson lefthanded. Seen them both in prime no way Jackson is even close to Mantle. That is like saying Bonds is a better HR hitter than the Babe. Seen them both no way. Forgetting the drugs etc..we have all gone over that idea...but Mickey could hit homeruns from both sides and his longest ones were from his left side. The only ball I have ever seen hit harder than some of the Babes were Frank Howard in Philly in which it went so far so fast past the pitcher at about eyelevel and then kept climbing out of the stadium. And Mickey hit one at Pittsburg that cleared the roof and he hit some at Yankee Stadium that looked longer than most of Jackson's. Jackson was a way above average hr hitter , his stats speaks to that, but looking at the two and watching them hit side by side would show you what I am talking about. Mr. October was a great team hr leader but Mantle could hurt you from both sides of the plate and was still able to hit homeruns against anyone but an Angels' reliever named Ryan Duran, according to Mantle that was the only pitcher he didn't really want to hit against. Duran threw 3/4sidearm and low to the ground and extremely fast and with a ball that sailed, would sink and move all over the place. I love it when someone starts putting the distances of the parks in here, but remember some of the distances of the older now nonexistence ones were measured at much longer distances than were put on the fences. Dead center at the LA Col in the 50's was over 500 ft and a wall 30 foot high and still some homers were hit over it. Don Demender in 59 hit one almost dead center and Steve Bilko hit one one afternoon in 59 that I think is still traveling towards the campus of USC. McGriff or Ott were completely different kind of hitters in both cases the park really didn't have a whole lot to do with it. Ott had a swing that was very different from McGriff but it was sweet when he hit the ball and it traveled long distances without much effort. Kelsday there are a lot of players in the hall of fame that maybe shouldn't be and a lot more that should. There are relieve pitchers that should be in the hall but will never get the chance. There are a lot of Black League players that with the stats they have should be in the hall and maybe will some day. PaPa Bell was a extremely good, if not great hitter, and like his major league counter part , Babe Ruth, hit the living horsehair off the ball and some of his homers are legendary in their own right. I watched him play a game against the Babe and other major leaguers and when Babe hit outa site , then PaPa hit one two almost the same way. One year in Fullerton California, Walter Johnson, who was from there, lead the Babe and a major league all-star team in a series of games. One afternoon on a field in Fullerton was Walter Johnson pitching and the Babe hitting in front of about 3 or 4 thousand people who really didn't know much about the majors because it wasn't something that was then all around the country from NY to LA anyway Walter is pitching everything up and in on Babe and Babe stops puts his hand up to halt Johnson front pitching and says to him with everyone looking "comeon now whats all this _____ just pitch it over the plate so I can hit. Your best fastball against my swing. Walter started his delivery and pumped twice and then let it go straight and fast as a train(his nickname) and it looked for sure that the ball would get by Ruth, but at the last second Ruth cocked his wrists and hit a shot straight over Walter's head and so deep that the outfielder in deep dead center just looked up and watched it go bye. My grandfather use to tell me that a lot of times it was just a fun game for them and it brought baseball out barnstorming all over the country. Only at the end of some of the games did it really get serious. Ruth, Paige, Bell, Johnson, Alexander, Hoyte, Grove the names go on and on. But getting back to the real issue OLD against the NEW. Players are different as night and day but the really great ones wouldn't matter playing then or now. I would give a lifetimes salary to see Ted Williams face Roger Steroid Clemens and face the face on Clemens as Williams hit the ball all over the place. And for Ruth it would be like taking candy from a baby. And on another note, I would pay to see Bonds facing Koufax or Gibson and watch them put the ball by him so fast it would make your heart jump. With him hitting so far up on the plate Gibson would put a 100 mph fastball in his ear. Against Koufax he wouldn't even get his bat off his shoulder. In this case here everyone is right...
Permalink | Reply
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
506 days ago
Score 0+-
I stand corrected... and gape jawed. This should be it's own article!
Permalink
Hawk29JV Squad
505 days ago
Score 0+-
i agree you cant measure a guys heart and motivation on a simulation
Permalink | Reply
Add your Comment
ArmchairGM welcomes all comments. If you don't want to be anonymous, Register or Login. It's free
Categories: Opinions | Opinions by User LouGehrig | June 23, 2008 | June 2008 | MLB Opinions | Baseball Eras Opinions | World Series Opinions | Connie Mack Opinions | Jack Coombs Opinions | Chief Bender Opinions | Walter Johnson Opinions | Christy Mathewson Opinions | Curt Schilling Opinions | Josh Beckett Opinions | Philadelpha Athletics. Opinions

Don't Miss

Phillies World Series 2009: A Year Later, and They Still Don't Want Us
Sorry, But I'm Not Sorry
2009 NHL Preview
In Which Ricketts Wins World Series
2009 Week 3: Let’s Talk About Your Favorite NFL Team

In the News

The Boston Celtics defeated the New Jersey Nets, 86-76 on Saturday. The Nets are now 0-7 - their worst start in franchise history.

Comments of the Day

0 Because snooker is a sport... And sports are facking AWESOM...
0 i personally think this list has no validity. it does...
0 I don"t think money is the object here. Even if he...

Play the Quiz Game

Has any MLB pitcher thrown 2 Perfect Games?

New Articles

Week 10 Postgame: "Don't Want No Drama!"
The Silver Lining of a Gold Glove
From Ninth to First: What If the Red Sox Had Tony Conigliaro in October?
Baseball & Basketball losing it!
Whether James will leave the Cleveland Cavaliers or not?

Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Article:Comparing_Baseball_Eras_is_Impossible_or_What_Sabermeticians_Can%27t_Do"

This page was last modified 15:34, 23 June 2008. Content is available under the GFDL.

Main Page About Special Pages Help Terms of Use Advertise